Video games don't contribute to violence? Nonsense!

911 said:
I don’t really see the connection. I would agree that some sports are violence as part of their makeup, but how do you equate watching a football game or a prize fight to participating in a mass shooting? Watching violent video games does show actual realism of bad guys taking out the police and citizens.

To some young people, what happens in video games and movies is real. I just watched a show on TV where a man was confessing to a crime and he made the comment that he hit another man on the head with a hammer because he saw it done in a movie and it killed the man. To some; perception is reality.
Click to expand...
I didn't mention football (which also results in brain damage). With football, brain damage is a consequence but not an intent; it doesn't depend on blood or brain damage to win. And--unlike fighting--there is no praise for brain damage, in fact there are penalties for excessive roughness and there is also protective equipment to minimize the damage. That's the difference.
 

win231 said:
I didn't mention football (which also results in brain damage). With football, brain damage is a consequence but not an intent; it doesn't depend on blood or brain damage to win. And--unlike fighting--there is no praise for brain damage, in fact there are penalties for excessive roughness and there is also protective equipment to minimize the damage. That's the difference.
Click to expand...

The penalties in football for excessive roughing have only been put in play and “enforced” to the degree that it is now the last maybe 10 years. It was a slow, but sure progression to penalize hits above the shoulders, late hits, hits out of bounds, etc. Even still, pro football is a risky business for the players. I still remember watching pro football back in the 50’s and the sometimes dirty hits that were allowed without penalty. I can still see NY Giants Sam Hough piling on Johnny Unitas, my man at the time. Even though I was a small kid at the time, it really ticked me off.

I recently saw an advertisement for an organization that is non profit and is asking for donations, so that they may help monetarily the ex-players from the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s and still alive. The ad states that it is because of those players that the BIG salaries are being paid today and that because they received a lot less compensation for their efforts and little to no medical reimbursement that we, the fans, should help right the wrong.

I feel differently. IMO, because today’s players are making the large salaries that they are and if it is because of the past efforts of the earlier players, then today’s players should be giving back by having a percentage of their salary being paid into the pool.

This non profit organization is soliciting today’s players & owners, corporations, sponsors, TV networks, fans, etc. to pay into a pool that will then be used to aid those players from the past that are in need of financial help. The ad also stated that most of the past players only receive a retirement salary of $2900.00 per month.

I think the organization is named Gridiron Greats Assistance Fund. I think that the NFL also has a similar fund set up.
 

Back
Top